Privacy vs. secrecy

EXAMINER EDITORIAL WRITER

Published 4:00 am, Monday, January 20, 1997

1997-01-20 04:00:00 PDT DALLAS -- PERPLEXING questions are raised in The Case of the Exonerated Cowboys, wherein two Dallas football players were accused of rape and left to twist slowly in the winds of public opinion for nearly two weeks.

Here are a few:

Why were writers, fans and others so quick to believe the allegations against the two Cowboys? Even considering that Dallas had changed from America's Team to the Bad Boys of Professional Sport, the public's rush to judgment was remarkable - and unseemly.

Why did police leak information about the case even before a formal complaint had been filed? (And, of course, charges against the players never were filed.)

Should the players' names have been announced? They now argue through their lawyers that newspapers should extend to accused rapists the privacy that newspapers routinely accord to rape victims - at least until the alleged perpetrators are formally charged with the crime.

But if newspapers are prevented from using their discretion in naming suspects, isn't that the first step toward a system of secret police and secret courts?

Putting that aside, should we agree now to slam the barn door by naming the athletes in 19th century fashion as wide receiver M------ I---- and defensive lineman E--- W- ------?

But because the public can fill in the blanks, is vindication delayed almost the same as vindication denied?

And why was it so slow in coming? Is it true, as claimed by lawyers for I--- and W------, that Dallas police had solid evidence of their innocence within two days of the accusations?

If so, why did police wait another 11 days before wrapping up the investigation, clearing the celebrities and finally announcing that the accuser had lied?

Because rape is such an abominable, evil and revolting crime, should police make an example of anyone who makes a false report that becomes an abominable, evil and revolting slander?

If so, would that have a chilling effect on the willingness of real rape victims to file accusations against famous or powerful men?

Is that why authorities waited so long before deciding to file misdemeanor charges Tuesday against N--- S--------, 23, the former stripper now described by police as a liar who stuck to her lurid story for 11 days, then recanted, then revived her claims?

Although she remains entitled to the presumption of innocence until and unless found guilty of filing a false police report ($2,000 fine, six months in jail), is there any compelling reason why newspapers should shield the identity of Nina Shahravan? By her deeds, she launched a law enforcement and media circus that smeared the reputations of two innocent victims.

Finally, how could a spokesman cheerfully say the Dallas Police Department is "comfortable" with how the investigation was handled?

And here's a final question without an easy answer: What would it take to make the department uncomfortable?&lt;

Latest from the SFGATE homepage:

Click below for the top news from around the Bay Area and beyond. Sign up for our newsletters to be the first to learn about breaking news and more. Go to 'Sign In' and 'Manage Profile' at the top of the page.